Collecting from the Future: Embedding Strategic Foresight in Museum Collections Development

Abstract

The paper calls for an alternative mode to the present-centric collections development practices guided by futures-oriented perspectives. This new approach, tentatively referenced to a curated choice of strategic foresight tools, would introduce the concept of “future memories” in collections management. Thanks to these tools, museums would be better equipped to anticipate societal change, address representational gaps, and curate collections for relevance in a multiple range of futures.

I frequently think of collections development practices as a process similar to species classification, with an acquisition process informed by present and past that has traditionally been the outcome of subjective curatorial processes (Macdonald 2006). Indeed, museums collect in the present, guided by the imperative to bridge past and present in anticipation of a hypothetical future. This process also has a context in a dialectical relationship between time and memory, in which a curated version of the past, often shaped by scientific and academic rigor, is legitimized through contemporary interpretative lenses. Indeed, Time and memory are dialectics that museums constantly engage with (Crane 2006).

Time, in this context, is often conceptualized from a fixed point: the present. Augustine of Hippo (2016), writing in the fourth century CE in present-day Algeria, articulated three modalities of time that are particularly pertinent to collections development (Augustine of Hippo in Manning et al. 2013). Augustine speaks about the “time present of things past” (memory), the “time present of things present” (direct experience), and the “time present of things future” (expectation). The common denominator for all three modalities is the present.

Memory, extensively discussed in the literature, particularly when referring to history museums (Black 2011), presents a more complex dimension. When analysed through temporality, memory emerges not as a static repository of the past but as a dynamic process shaped by temporal context and perspective. In practice, this refers to how museums adapt and revise their narratives over time. It would also refer to their evolving role as memory agents shaping societal remembrance and amnesia through curatorial choices, which can be considered acts of memory construction in their own right (Crane 2000).

The dialectic between time and memory is materialised in museum contexts by interpreting the past from a present standpoint. In so doing, museums serve as mediators between historical moments and current realities, shaping present and future public understanding through acts of remembrance, forgetting, and reinterpretation. They oftentimes offer a curated memory of the past, selectively preserved and imbued with materiality through object-based representation.

This time-memory dialectic is not limited to retroactive reflection. It can be projected forward, generating a broad range of scenarios that inform what may become the memory of the present, retroactively anchored from envisioned futures. We might refer to these as future memories referenced to our present. This forward-facing perspective aligns with futures thinking, specifically strategic foresight, which is defined as the structured exploration of how different futures may unfold (Rohrbeck and Schwarz 2013). Strategic foresight is a tool with which to anticipate change, managing uncertainty, and shape desirable outcomes (Miller 2018). It empowers informed decisions about what to collect and how to interpret material culture in anticipation of future relevance. In simpler terms, this approach is about curating from the perspective of a future person. It has already informed museum practice in varied ways (Alford 2024) and can be envisioned as a futures-literacy toolbox.

One possible version of a futures-literacy museum toolbox for collections development practices might be bracketed by anticipation—exploring possibilities—and action—implementing futures-oriented initiatives. I focus on three key tools that sit comfortably within this bracket.

Horizon scanning, closely aligned with anticipation, involves the identification of emerging signals, weak trends, and early indicators of change (Cuhls 2019). Applied to museums, this method can help identify under-represented domains in cultural collections such as digital heritage, social justice movements, or climate-related artefacts, thereby ensuring that collecting policies remain responsive to societal transformation. This tool allows institutions to ask: what is not being covered in our collections development and acquisition policies if we map out trends, signals and indicators of change?

Scenario planning, positioned between anticipation and action, enables museums to explore multiple futures and devise flexible strategies accordingly (Mortlock and Osiyevskyy 2023). Scenario planning ensures that current acquisitions retain cultural and interpretive significance across various future environments, including technologically saturated or post-anthropocentric worlds. This tool allows institutions to ask: How and in what ways might a given collection retain relevance across three or four divergent future scenarios?

By contrast, backcasting would be action-oriented. The starting point would be a clearly defined and desirable future, such as equitable representation in collections, with retrofitted collections development methodologies determining the steps necessary to realize that vision (Quist and Vergragt 2006). In practical terms, this may involve identifying the thematic or demographic representational gaps that must be addressed in the present to ensure the future relevance of the institution’s holdings. This tool allows institutions to ask: How can we address a specific future scenario with focused acquisition policies informed by a desired vision or stand?

This choice of strategic foresight tools offers a balanced framework for collections development that is both responsive and resilient. By embedding such methodologies, museums can anticipate cultural shifts, diversify narratives, and better fulfil their stewardship responsibilities in an evolving world.

Systemically integrating strategic foresight into collections development processes might also contribute to recalibrating museum practice. It calls us to reconsider our reliance on present-centric thinking, as articulated by Augustine, and instead ask: What type of future memories can museums define from a futures perspective and in what ways would this change today’s collecting practices?